Re: new PRNG's

[Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@...>]

> By "the current implementation" below I meant what was presented in
> the ongoing discussion. Poor writing/editing that.
> 
> 
> >>Are there serious flaws that disqualifies the current implementation
> >>from this purpose?

If I understood your last message correctly, you are asking why
to change from xorshift128plus to xoshiro256**. xorshift128plus
does not have any serious (or non-serious) flaws for our purpose,
despite what some pundits may say. Nevertheless, some pundits will
complain about xorshift128plus (they already did), which generates
noise (e.g., "avoid the lower bits"). The implementation of xoshiro256**
is basically as simple as xorshift128plus, and avoids the noise.

-- Roberto